This is part of the idea underlying OpenCog (opencog.org), though it's
being done
in a nonprofit vein rather than commercially...
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 1:55 AM, John G. Rose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just a thought, maybe there are some commonalities across AGI designs where
components could
John G. Rose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you look at the state of internet based intelligence now, all the data
and its structure, the potential for chain reaction or a sort of structural
vacuum exists and it is accumulating a potential at an increasing rate.
IMO...
So you see the arrival of a
Tipping Point may not be the right word for it. I see it as sort of an
unraveling and then a remolding. Much of the internet is still coming out of
resource compression. It has to stretch out and reoptimize like seeking a
lower energy expenditure structure for higher complexity traffic, but the
--- Eric B. Ramsay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John G. Rose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you look at the state of internet based intelligence now, all the
data
and its structure, the potential for chain reaction or a sort of
structural
vacuum exists and it is accumulating a potential at an
Matt Mahoney writes: As for AGI research, I believe the most viable path is a
distributed architecture that uses the billions of human brains and computers
already on the Internet. What is needed is an infrastructure that routes
information to the right experts and an economy that rewards
From: Matt Mahoney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
You won't see a singularity. As I explain in
http://www.mattmahoney.net/singularity.html an intelligent agent (you)
is not capable of recognizing agents of significantly greater
intelligence. We don't know whether a singularity has already
On Tue, Apr 8, 2008 at 3:01 PM, Richard Loosemore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have just written a new blog post that is the begining of a daily series
this week and next, when I will be launching a few broadsides against the
orthodoxy and explaining where I am going with my work.
--- Derek Zahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matt Mahoney writes: As for AGI research, I believe the most viable
path is a distributed architecture that uses the billions of human
brains and computers already on the Internet. What is needed is an
infrastructure that routes information to the
Matt Mahoney writes: Super-google is nifty, but I don't see how it is AGI.
Because a super-google will answer these questions by routing them to
experts on these topics that will use natural language in their narrow domains
of expertise. All of this can be done with existing technology and a
There is no way to know if we are living in a nested simulation, or even
in a
single simulation. However there is a mathematical model: enumerate all
Turing machines to find one that simulates a universe with intelligent
life.
What if that nest of simulations loop around somehow? What
Matt : a super-google will answer these questions by routing them to
experts on these topics that will use natural language in their narrow
domains of expertise.
And Santa will answer every child's request, and we'll all live happily ever
after. Amen.
Which are these areas of science,
Matt : a super-google will answer these questions by routing them to
experts on these topics that will use natural language in their narrow
domains of expertise.
Another interesting question here is: on how many occasions are the majority
of experts in any given field, wrong? I don't begin to
--- John G. Rose [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There is no way to know if we are living in a nested simulation, or even
in a
single simulation. However there is a mathematical model: enumerate all
Turing machines to find one that simulates a universe with intelligent
life.
What if
--- Mike Tintner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matt : a super-google will answer these questions by routing them to
experts on these topics that will use natural language in their narrow
domains of expertise.
And Santa will answer every child's request, and we'll all live happily ever
after.
If I understand what I have read in this thread so far, there is Ben on the one
hand suggesting $10 mil. with 10-30 people in 3 to 10 years and on the other
there is Matt saying $1quadrillion, using a billion brains in 30 years. I don't
believe I have ever seen such a divergence of opinion
Well, Matt and I are talking about building totally different kinds of
systems...
I believe the system he wants to build would cost a huge amount ...
but I don't think
it's the most interesting sorta thing to build ...
A decent analogue would be spaceships. All sorts of designs exist, some
--- Eric B. Ramsay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If I understand what I have read in this thread so far, there is Ben on the
one hand suggesting $10 mil. with 10-30 people in 3 to 10 years and on the
other there is Matt saying $1quadrillion, using a billion brains in 30
years. I don't believe I
Of course what I imagine emerging from the Internet bears little resemblance
to Novamente. It is simply too big to invest in directly, but it will
present
many opportunities.
But the emergence of superhuman AGI's like a Novamente may eventually become,
will both dramatically alter the
Sure, but Matt is also suggesting that his path is the most viable and so from
the point of view of an investor, he/she is faced with very divergent opinions
on the type of resources needed to get to the AGI expeditiously. It's far
easier to understand wide price swings in a spaceship to get
As described in my Texai roadmap, it might be possible to achieve AGI using
primarily volunteer, no-cost human labor. A precondition is a human/computer
interface that can intelligently acquire knowledge and skills, and is
compelling enough for early adopters to use it. If the profit motive
I have just written a new blog post that is the begining of a daily
series this week and next, when I will be launching a few broadsides
against the orthodoxy and explaining where I am going with my work.
http://susaro.com/
Richard Loosemore
---
21 matches
Mail list logo
